[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 212 (Friday, November 2, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62112-62117]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21522]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

22 CFR Part 62

[Public Notice: 5981]
RIN 1400-AC29


 Exchange Visitor Program--Sanctions and Terminations

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department is amending its regulations to add to and 
modify the existing actions for which the Department may sanction a 
sponsor. The change in the regulations will streamline the review 
process to offer sanctioned sponsors the procedural due process rights 
equal to those that the Administrative Procedure Act guarantees. In 
addition, the Final Rule eliminates summary suspension and modifies 
program suspension to halt the activities of a sponsor that has 
committed a serious act of omission or commission which has or could 
have the effect of endangering the health, safety, or welfare of an 
exchange visitor, or damage the national security interests of the 
United States.

DATES: Effective Date: This Final Rule is effective 30 days from 
November 2, 2007.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The former United States Information Agency 
(USIA) and, as of October 1, 1999, its successor, the U.S. Department 
of State (Department), have promulgated regulations governing the 
Exchange Visitor Program. Those regulations now appear at 22 CFR Part 
62. The regulations governing sanctions appear at 22 CFR 62.50, and 
regulations governing termination of a sponsor's designation, at 22 CFR 
62.60 through 62.62. The ultimate goals of the sanctions regulations 
are to further the foreign policy interests of the United States, and 
to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Exchange Visitor Program 
participants. These regulations largely have remained unchanged since 
1993, when the USIA undertook a major regulatory reform of the Exchange 
Visitor Program, as administered by the Office of Exchange Coordination 
and Designation (Office).
    On May 31, 2007, the Department published a Proposed Rule on 
sanctions and terminations with a comment period ending July 30, 2007. 
72 FR 30302-30308. Forty-nine (49) parties filed comments, which the 
Department reviewed and evaluated. The Alliance for International 
Educational and Cultural Exchange (Alliance), a membership 
organization, and the Council on International Educational Exchange 
(CIEE) represented a number of individual designated program sponsors 
in their comments. Twenty-five (25) commenting parties favored the 
Proposed Rule. The remaining commenting parties criticized the Proposed 
Rule in one or more respects, and several parties recommended changes 
to the Proposed Rule.
    Having thoroughly reviewed the comments and the changes that 
commenting parties recommended, the Department has determined that it 
will, and hereby does, adopt the Proposed Rule, with minor edits, and 
promulgates it as a Final Rule. The Department's evaluation of the 
written comments and recommendations follows.

    As the Department noted in the Supplementary Information 
accompanying the Proposed Rule, The [Fulbright-Hays] Act authorizes 
the President to provide for such exchanges if it would strengthen 
international cooperative relations. The language of the Act and its 
legislative history make it clear that the Congress considered 
international educational and cultural exchanges to be a significant 
part of the public diplomacy efforts of the President in connection 
with Constitutional prerogatives in conducting foreign affairs. 
Thus, exchange visitor programs that do not further the public 
diplomacy goals of the United States should not be designated 
initially, or retain their designation. Accordingly, it is 
imperative that the Department have the power to revoke program 
designations or deny applications for program redesignation when it 
determines that such programs do not serve the country's public 
diplomacy goals.

    The above statement is the underpinning for the Department's entire 
approach to the sanctions regime of the Exchange Visitor Program.

Comment Analysis

    One of the overall criticisms of the Proposed Rule was that the 
Department eliminated the requirement that it find alleged violations 
of Part 62 to be willful or negligent before imposing sanctions. 
Fifteen (15) comments were opposed to the change. The Department 
believes that such criticism is without merit. A program sponsor, prior 
to being designated or redesignated, must demonstrate that it (i.e., 
the responsible officer and alternate responsible

[[Page 62113]]

officer(s)), its employees, and third parties acting on its behalf have 
the knowledge and ability to comply and remain in continual compliance 
with all provisions of part 62. [Sec.  62.3(b)(1); Sec.  62.9(a) and 
(f)(1) and (2); and Sec.  62.11(a).] Since knowledge and ability to 
comply and remain in full compliance with the regulations are 
fundamental requirements of sponsor designation, it is essentially 
irrelevant whether a sponsor violates regulations willfully, 
negligently, or even inadvertently. Violations, whether or not willful 
or negligent, may harm the national security or the public diplomacy 
goals of the United States, or pose a threat to the health, safety or 
welfare of program participants, and the Department must have the 
capacity to respond appropriately. Moreover, the process set forth in 
the revised sanctions regulations provides that a sponsor being 
sanctioned may submit a statement in opposition to or mitigation of the 
proposed sanction. This process provides the sponsor with the 
opportunity to explain the circumstances of the alleged violation, and 
to argue that a lesser sanction, or no sanction at all, would be 
appropriate in view of those circumstances. In addition, the review 
process available for significant sanctions provides a second 
opportunity for the sponsor to make its case before a panel of three 
Review Officers not connected with the Exchange Visitor Program, thus 
affording additional protection from the arbitrary or capricious 
imposition of sanctions. A total of sixteen (16) comments were in favor 
of the change.
    Twelve (12) commenting parties opined that the criteria for 
imposing sanctions are extremely broad and do not provide an adequate 
basis for the Department to determine, for example, under what 
circumstances it would propose to terminate rather than suspend a 
sponsor's designation or impose lesser sanctions. It should be noted in 
this regard that four of the six grounds for imposing sanctions are the 
same as those in the prior rule. The two new grounds--actions that may 
compromise the national security of the United States or undermine its 
foreign policy objectives--are of a nature that inherently requires 
broad discretion in the choice of appropriate sanctions. Moreover, as 
previously noted, the process for imposing and reviewing proposed 
sanctions affords a sponsor ample opportunity to argue that alternative 
sanctions would be more appropriate.
    Nineteen (19) of the commenting parties criticized the lack of an 
agency review process for the ``lesser sanctions,'' in which the 
decision of the Office is the final Department decision. [Sec.  
62.50(b)] One (1) comment was in favor. However, the lack of a review 
process for ``lesser sanctions'' is unchanged from the prior rule. 
Under the prior rule, reduction in the size of a sponsor's program was 
deemed a ``lesser sanction'' (and thus not subject to further agency 
review) if it was limited to a reduction in participants of 10 percent 
or less or, in the case of a geographical reduction, if it would not 
cause a significant financial burden for the sponsor. The only change 
in the Proposed Rule was an increase in the potential size of the 
reduction, from 10 to 15 percent, and the reminder that subsequent 10-
percent reductions may be imposed in the case of continued violations 
(a possibility that was inherent in the prior rule). The reason for the 
more limited process for ``lesser sanctions'' remains the same as in 
the prior rule: their relatively minor impact on sponsors does not 
justify the burden and expense, for both the Department and sponsors, 
of the more extensive process afforded for more significant sanctions. 
The modest increase of 5 percent in the size of a potential program 
reduction does not, in the Department's view, alter this rationale.
    Fourteen (14) commenting parties criticized the bases for and the 
process by which the Department will implement a suspension. The prior 
rule allowed for ``suspension'' and ``summary suspension.'' In 
practice, the Department never utilized the suspension provision of the 
regulations, and that provision is eliminated in the Final Rule, which 
redesignates ``summary suspension'' as ``suspension.'' Under the prior 
rule, only one ground for this sanction existed: endangering the 
health, safety or welfare of a participant. The Final Rule adds another 
ground, the necessity of which became apparent after the events of 9/
11: Damaging the national security interests of the United States. The 
Department believes that the continued necessity for it to be able to 
act swiftly, and with immediate effect, in such circumstances is self-
evident. Moreover, it should be noted that the summary process for such 
suspensions has been improved for sponsors in two respects. First, a 
sponsor is afforded additional time in which to submit an initial 
opposition to the suspension. Second, such an opposition is received, 
reviewed and decided at a higher level, by the Principal Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs (PDAS) rather 
than by the Office. As under the prior rule, the sponsor may seek 
further agency review of this decision, by a three-member review panel.
    Thirteen (13) of the commenting parties criticized new language 
providing that the Department may determine that a class of designated 
programs compromises the national security of the United States or no 
longer furthers the public diplomacy mission of the United States 
[Sec.  62.62]. Three (3) comments were in favor of this regulation. If 
the Department makes such a determination, it may revoke the 
designations, or deny applications for redesignation, of sponsors of 
that class of exchange visitor programs. As the Department noted in the 
Supplementary Information accompanying the Proposed Rule, the Exchange 
Visitor Program is part of the Department's public diplomacy efforts in 
furtherance of the President's Constitutional prerogatives in 
conducting foreign affairs. Accordingly, the Department noted, 
termination of a program category because it no longer furthers the 
Department's public diplomacy mission, or compromises national 
security, has always been inherently within the discretion of the 
Department. Following 9/11, the Department concluded that its 
regulations should make that authority, and the means by which it would 
be exercised, explicit.
    Thirteen (13) of the commenting parties opposed the elimination of 
a trial-type hearing in appeals of significant sanctions. Moreover, 
those same parties opine that the criteria for imposing a suspension 
are more stringent than the criteria for revoking a designation or 
denying an application for redesignation of a program.
    It is entirely appropriate that the grounds for the suspension 
sanction be drawn far more narrowly than those for the other 
significant sanctions. Suspension represents a rapid response to an 
urgent problem, with expedited procedures including the possibility of 
an immediately effective sanction, not stayed by any opposition or 
request for review. In this, it is unlike any other sanction. That is 
why it is reserved for violations whose seriousness justifies it: Cases 
in which national security is compromised, or in which a danger is 
posed to the health, safety or welfare of participants. It would be 
inappropriate to apply its procedures to other violations; and it would 
be equally inappropriate to restrict the availability of other 
sanctions to its narrow grounds.
    With regard to the elimination of trial-type review procedures for 
significant sanctions, the Department has found that such procedures 
are costly, time-consuming and burdensome for both the

[[Page 62114]]

Department and sponsors. As noted in the Supplementary Information 
accompanying the Proposed Rule, such procedures are not required by any 
applicable statute, and are not necessary to afford due process. Under 
the Final Rule, sponsors are afforded notice and ample, repeated 
opportunities to be heard. When the Office proposes a significant 
sanction, a sponsor may submit to the PDAS an opposition, including 
factual and legal arguments and additional documentary material, such 
as affidavits and other evidence. Following a statement in response by 
the Office, the PDAS issues a written, reasoned decision confirming, 
withdrawing or modifying the sanction. The sponsor may then seek review 
of the PDAS decision, before a three-member panel, no member of which 
may be from the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (of which 
the Office forms a part, and which is supervised by the PDAS). Once 
again, the sponsor has the opportunity to file a statement setting 
forth arguments of fact and law, accompanied by documentary evidence 
and other attachments. Following a statement in response by the PDAS, 
the review panel may, at its discretion, convene a brief meeting with 
the parties, solely for the purpose of clarifying the written 
submissions. Then the review panel issues a written, reasoned decision 
confirming, withdrawing or modifying the sanction. This procedure 
affords ample notice and opportunity to be heard, with a reasoned 
decision on a clear record. If the program sponsor is not satisfied 
with the decision ultimately reached by the Review Officers, it 
continues to have the same opportunities as before to seek relief in an 
appropriate court.
    Finally, ten (10) of the commenting parties requested that sponsors 
be given the opportunity to cure alleged violations before the 
Department imposes sanctions. The Department believes that if it were 
to provide sponsors in all cases the automatic right to cure an alleged 
violation or deficiency with no risk that an actual sanction will be 
imposed, then the deterrent effect of the sanctions regime effectively 
would be eliminated. However, as a practical matter, the Office seldom 
proposes formal sanctions without first engaging in informal 
discussions seeking to bring the sponsor into voluntary compliance. 
Moreover, although there is no right to cure, a sponsor facing the 
imposition of sanctions certainly may offer a settlement or, in 
submitting its statement in opposition to or mitigation of the 
sanction, show it has cured the alleged violations and argue for a less 
severe sanction, or no sanction at all, and may request a meeting to 
present its views.
    Seven (7) comments favored, and two opposed, the paper review set 
forth at Sec.  62.50(f). The comments stated that a review should also 
include statements and information provided by exchange visitor 
participants, concerned citizens, and school officials.
    Thirteen (13) comments were received in favor of a sponsor's not 
being able to reapply for designation for a minimum of five (5) years 
once a designation has been revoked.
    For the foregoing reasons, the Department is promulgating the 
Proposed Rule as a Final Rule.

Regulatory Analysis

Administrative Procedure Act, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, and 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    The Department has determined that this Final Rule involves a 
foreign affairs function of the United States and is consequently 
exempt from the procedures required by 5 U.S.C. 553 pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 553(a)(1).
    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), 
Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires 
agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may 
result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local 
or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not 
result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely 
affect small businesses.
    The Final Rule has been found not to be a major rule within the 
meaning of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996. It will not have a substantial effect on the States, the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government. Therefore, it has been determined that the Final Rule does 
not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant application of 
the consultation provisions of Executive Orders 12372 and 13132.

Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business

    Since this rulemaking is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 553 and no other law 
required the Department to give notice of proposed rulemaking, this 
rulemaking also is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) or Executive Order 13272, Sec.  3(b). Nonetheless, 
the Department has analyzed the provisions of the Final Rule and 
certifies that it will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Executive Order 12866, as Amended

    The Department does not consider this Final Rule to be a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, as 
amended, Sec.  3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. In addition, the 
Department is exempt from Executive Order 12866 except to the extent 
that it is promulgating, in conjunction with a domestic agency, 
regulations that are significant regulatory actions. The Department 
has, nevertheless, reviewed the Final Rule to ensure its consistency 
with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in that 
Executive Order.

Executive Order 12988

    The Department has reviewed this Final Rule in light of Sec. Sec.  
3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, 
minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce 
burden.

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132

    This Final Rule will not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Sec.  6 of 
Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this Rule does not have 
sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant 
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The 
regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding 
intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do 
not apply to this regulation.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This Final Rule does not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 
35.

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 62

    Cultural Exchange Programs.

0
Accordingly, 22 CFR part 62 is amended as follows:

PART 62--EXCHANGE VISITOR PROGRAM

0
1. The Authority citation for part 62 is amended as follows:


[[Page 62115]]


    Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J), 1182, 1184, 1258; 22 U.S.C. 
1431-1442, 2451-2460; Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act 
of 1998, Pub. L. 105-277, Div. G, 112 Stat. 2681-761 et seq.; 
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp. p. 200; E.O. 
12048 of March 27, 1978; 3 CFR, 1978 Comp. p. 168; the Illegal 
Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 
1996, Pub. L. 104-208, Div. C, 110 Stat. 3009-546, as amended; 
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools 
Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA 
PATRIOT ACT), Pub. L. 107-56, Sec. 416, 115 Stat. 354; and the 
Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002, Pub. L. 
107-173, 116 Stat. 543.

0
2. Section 62.50 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  62.50  Sanctions.

    (a) Reasons for sanctions. The Department of State (Department) may 
impose sanctions against a sponsor upon a finding by its Office of 
Exchange Coordination and Designation (Office) that the sponsor has:
    (1) Violated one or more provisions of this Part;
    (2) Evidenced a pattern of failure to comply with one or more 
provisions of this Part;
    (3) Committed an act of omission or commission, which has or could 
have the effect of endangering the health, safety, or welfare of an 
exchange visitor; or
    (4) Otherwise conducted its program in such a way as to undermine 
the foreign policy objectives of the United States, compromise the 
national security interests of the United States, or bring the 
Department or the Exchange Visitor Program into notoriety or disrepute.
    (b) Lesser sanctions. (1) In order to ensure full compliance with 
the regulations in this Part, the Department, in its discretion and 
depending on the nature and seriousness of the violation, may impose 
any or all of the following sanctions ( ``lesser sanctions'') on a 
sponsor upon a finding that the sponsor engaged in any of the acts or 
omissions set forth in Sec.  62.50(a):
    (i) A written reprimand to the sponsor, with a warning that 
repeated or persistent violations of the regulations in this Part may 
result in suspension or revocation of the sponsor's Exchange Visitor 
Program designation, or other sanctions as set forth herein;
    (ii) A declaration placing the exchange visitor sponsor's program 
on probation, for a period of time determined by the Department in its 
discretion, signifying a pattern of violation of regulations such that 
further violations could lead to suspension or revocation of the 
sponsor's Exchange Visitor Program designation, or other sanctions as 
set forth herein;
    (iii) A corrective action plan designed to cure the sponsor's 
violations; or
    (iv) Up to a 15 percent (15%) reduction in the authorized number of 
exchange visitors in the sponsor's program or in the geographic area of 
its recruitment or activity. If the sponsor continues to violate the 
regulations in this Part, the Department may impose subsequent 
additional reductions, in ten-percent (10%) increments, in the 
authorized number of exchange visitors in the sponsor's program or in 
the geographic area of its recruitment or activity.
    (2) Within ten (10) days after service of the written notice to the 
sponsor imposing any of the sanctions set forth in Sec.  62.50(b)(1), 
the sponsor may submit to the Office a statement in opposition to or 
mitigation of the sanction. Such statement may not exceed 20 pages in 
length, double-spaced and, if appropriate, may include additional 
documentary material. Sponsors shall include with all documentary 
material an index of the documents and a summary of the relevance of 
each document presented. Upon review and consideration of such 
submission, the Office may, in its discretion, modify, withdraw, or 
confirm such sanction. All materials the sponsor submits will become a 
part of the sponsor's file with the Office.
    (3) The decision of the Office is the final Department decision 
with regard to lesser sanctions in Sec.  62.50(b)(1)(i)-(iv).
    (c) Suspension. (1) Upon a finding that a sponsor has committed a 
serious act of omission or commission which has or could have the 
effect of endangering the health, safety, or welfare of an exchange 
visitor, or of damaging the national security interests of the United 
States, the Office may serve the sponsor with written notice of its 
decision to suspend the designation of the sponsor's program for a 
period not to exceed one hundred twenty (120) days. Such notice must 
specify the grounds for the sanction and the effective date thereof, 
advise the sponsor of its right to oppose the suspension, and identify 
the procedures for submitting a statement of opposition thereto. 
Suspension under this paragraph need not be preceded by the imposition 
of any other sanction or notice.
    (2)(i) Within five (5) days after service of such notice, the 
sponsor may submit to the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Educational and Cultural Affairs (Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, 
or PDAS) a statement in opposition to the Office's decision. Such 
statement may not exceed 20 pages in length, double-spaced and, if 
appropriate, may include additional documentary material. A sponsor 
shall include with all documentary material an index of the documents 
and a summary of the relevance of each document presented. The 
submission of a statement in opposition to the Office's decision will 
not serve to stay the effective date of the suspension.
    (ii) Within five (5) days after receipt of, and upon consideration 
of, such opposition, the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary shall 
confirm, modify, or withdraw the suspension by serving the sponsor with 
a written decision. Such decision must specify the grounds therefore, 
and advise the sponsor of the procedures for requesting review of the 
decision.
    (iii) All materials the sponsor submits will become a part of the 
sponsor's file with the Office.
    (3) The procedures for review of the decision of the Principal 
Deputy Assistant Secretary are set forth in Sec. Sec.  62.50(d)(3) and 
(4), (g), and (h), except that the submission of a request for review 
will not serve to stay the suspension.
    (d) Revocation of designation. (1) Upon a finding of any act or 
omission set forth at Sec.  62.50(a), the Office may serve a sponsor 
with not less than thirty (30) days' written notice of its intent to 
revoke the sponsor's Exchange Visitor Program designation. Such notice 
must specify the grounds for the proposed sanction and its effective 
date, advise the sponsor of its right to oppose the proposed sanction, 
and identify the procedures for submitting a statement of opposition 
thereto. Revocation of designation under this paragraph need not be 
preceded by the imposition of any other sanction or notice.
    (2)(i) Within ten (10) days after service of such written notice of 
intent to revoke designation, the sponsor may submit to the Principal 
Deputy Assistant Secretary a statement in opposition to or mitigation 
of the proposed sanction, which may include a request for a meeting.
    (ii) The submission of such statement will serve to stay the 
effective date of the proposed sanction pending the decision of the 
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary.
    (iii) The Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary shall provide a copy 
of the statement in opposition to or mitigation of the proposed 
sanction to the Office. The Office shall submit a statement in 
response, and shall provide the sponsor with a copy thereof.
    (iv) A statement in opposition to or mitigation of the proposed 
sanction, or

[[Page 62116]]

statement in response thereto, may not exceed 25 pages in length, 
double-spaced and, if appropriate, may include additional documentary 
material. Any additional documentary material may include an index of 
the documents and a summary of the relevance of each document 
presented.
    (v) Upon consideration of such statements, the Principal Deputy 
Assistant Secretary shall modify, withdraw, or confirm the proposed 
sanction by serving the sponsor with a written decision. Such decision 
shall specify the grounds therefor, identify its effective date, advise 
the sponsor of its right to request a review, and identify the 
procedures for requesting such review.
    (vi) All materials the sponsor submits will become a part of the 
sponsor's file with the Office.
    (3) Within ten (10) days after service of such written notice of 
the decision of the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, the sponsor 
may submit a request for review with the Principal Deputy Assistant 
Secretary. The submission of such request for review will serve to stay 
the effective date of the decision pending the outcome of the review.
    (4) Within ten (10) days after receipt of such request for review, 
the Department shall designate a panel of three Review Officers 
pursuant to Sec.  62.50(g), and the Principal Deputy Assistant 
Secretary shall forward to each panel member all notices, statements, 
and decisions submitted or provided pursuant to the preceding 
paragraphs of Sec.  62.50(d). Thereafter, the review will be conducted 
pursuant to Sec.  62.50(g) and (h).
    (e) Denial of application for redesignation. Upon a finding of any 
act or omission set forth at Sec.  62.50(a), the Office may serve a 
sponsor with not less than thirty (30) days' written notice of its 
intent to deny the sponsor's application for redesignation. Such notice 
must specify the grounds for the proposed sanction and its effective 
date, advise the sponsor of its right to oppose the proposed sanction, 
and identify the procedures for submitting a statement of opposition 
thereto. Denial of redesignation under this section need not be 
preceded by the imposition of any other sanction or notice. The 
procedures for opposing a proposed denial of redesignation are set 
forth in Sec.  62.50(d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), (g), and (h).
    (f) Responsible officers. The Office may direct a sponsor to 
suspend or revoke the appointment of a responsible officer or alternate 
responsible officer for any of the reasons set forth in Sec.  62.50(a). 
The procedures for suspending or revoking a responsible officer or 
alternate responsible officer are set forth at Sec.  62.50(d), (g), and 
(h).
    (g) Review officers. A panel of three Review Officers shall hear a 
sponsor's request for review pursuant to Sec.  62.50(c), (d), (e), and 
(f). The Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public 
Affairs shall designate one senior official from an office reporting to 
him/her, other than from the Bureau of Educational and Cultural 
Affairs, as a member of the Panel. The Assistant Secretary of State for 
Consular Affairs and the Legal Adviser shall each designate one senior 
official from their bureaus as members of the Panel.
    (h) Review. The Review Officers may affirm, modify, or reverse the 
sanction imposed by the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary. The 
following procedures shall apply to the review:
    (1) Upon its designation, the panel of Review Officers shall 
promptly notify the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary and the 
sponsor in writing of the identity of the Review Officers and the 
address to which all communications with the Review Officers shall be 
directed.
    (2) Within fifteen (15) days after service of such notice, the 
sponsor may submit to the Review Officers four (4) copies of a 
statement identifying the grounds on which the sponsor asserts that the 
decision of the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary should be reversed 
or modified. Any such statement may not exceed 25 pages in length, 
double-spaced; and any attachments thereto shall not exceed 50 pages. A 
sponsor shall include with all attachments an index of the documents 
and a summary of the relevance of each document presented. The Review 
Officers shall transmit one (1) copy of any such statement to the 
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, who shall, within fifteen (15) 
days after receipt of such statement, submit four (4) copies of a 
statement in response. Any such statement may not exceed 25 pages in 
length, double-spaced; and any attachments thereto shall not exceed 50 
pages. The Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary shall include with all 
attachments an index of the documents and a summary of the relevance of 
each document presented. The Review Officers shall transmit one (1) 
copy of any such statement to the sponsor. No other submissions may be 
made unless specifically authorized by the Review Officers.
    (3) If the Review Officers determine, in their sole discretion, 
that a meeting for the purpose of clarification of the written 
submissions should be held, they shall schedule a meeting to be held 
within twenty (20) days after the receipt of the last written 
submission. The meeting will be limited to no more than two (2) hours. 
The purpose of the meeting will be limited to the clarification of the 
written submissions. No transcript may be taken and no evidence, either 
through documents or by witnesses, will be received. The sponsor and 
the representative of the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary may 
attend the meeting on their own behalf and may be accompanied by 
counsel.
    (4) Following the conclusion of the meeting, or the submission of 
the last written submission if no meeting is held, the Review Officers 
shall promptly review the submissions of the sponsor and the Principal 
Deputy Assistant Secretary, and shall issue a signed written decision 
within thirty (30) days, stating the basis for their decision. A copy 
of the decision will be delivered to the Principal Deputy Assistant 
Secretary and the sponsor.
    (5) If the Review Officers decide to affirm or modify the sanction, 
a copy of their decision shall also be delivered to the Department of 
Homeland Security and to the Bureau of Consular Affairs of the 
Department of State. The Office, at its discretion, may further 
distribute the decision.
    (6) Unless otherwise indicated, the sanction, if affirmed or 
modified, is effective as of the date of the Review Officers' written 
decision, except in the case of suspension of program designation, 
which is effective as of the date specified pursuant to Sec.  62.50(c).
    (i) Effect of suspension, revocation, or denial of redesignation. A 
sponsor against which an order of suspension, revocation, or denial of 
redesignation has become effective may not thereafter issue any 
Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J-1) Status (Form DS-
2019) or advertise, recruit for, or otherwise promote its program. 
Under no circumstances shall the sponsor facilitate the entry of an 
exchange visitor into the United States. An order of suspension, 
revocation, or denial of redesignation will not in any way diminish or 
restrict the sponsor's legal or financial responsibilities to existing 
program applicants or participants.
    (j) Miscellaneous--(1) Computation of time. In computing any period 
of time prescribed or allowed by these regulations, the day of the act 
or event from which the designated period of time begins to run is not 
included. The last day of the period so computed is included unless it 
is a Saturday, a Sunday, or a Federal legal holiday, in which event the 
period runs until the end of the next day which is not one of

[[Page 62117]]

the aforementioned days. When the period of time prescribed or allowed 
is fewer than eleven (11) days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, or 
Federal legal holidays are excluded in the computation.
    (2) Service of notice to sponsor. Service of notice to a sponsor 
pursuant to this section may be accomplished through written notice by 
mail, delivery, or facsimile, upon the president, chief executive 
officer, managing director, General Counsel, responsible officer, or 
alternate responsible officer of the sponsor.

0
3. Subpart E is revised to read as follows:

Subpart E--Termination and Revocation of Programs

Sec.
62.60 Termination of designation.
62.61 Revocation.
62.62 Termination of, or denial of redesignation for, a class of 
designated programs.
62.63 Responsibilities of the sponsor upon termination or 
revocation.


Sec.  62.60  Termination of designation.

    Designation will be terminated upon the occurrence of any of the 
circumstances set forth in this section.
    (a) Voluntary termination. A sponsor notifies the Department of its 
intent to terminate its designation voluntarily and withdraws its 
program in SEVIS via submission of a ``cancel program'' request. The 
sponsor's designation shall terminate upon submission of such 
notification. Such sponsor may apply for a new program designation.
    (b) Inactivity. A sponsor fails to comply with the minimum program 
size or duration requirements, as specified in Sec.  62.8 (a) and (b), 
in any 12-month period. Such sponsor may apply for a new program 
designation.
    (c) Failure to file annual reports. A sponsor fails to file annual 
reports for two (2) consecutive years. Such sponsor is eligible to 
apply for a new program designation.
    (d) Failure to file an annual management audit. A sponsor fails to 
file an annual management audit, if such audits are required in the 
relevant program category. Such sponsor is eligible to apply for a new 
program designation upon the filing of the past due management audit.
    (e) Change in ownership or control. An exchange visitor program 
designation is not assignable or transferable. A major change in 
ownership or control automatically terminates the designation. However, 
the successor sponsor may apply for designation of the new entity, and 
it may continue to administer the exchange visitor activities of the 
previously-designated program while the application for designation is 
pending before the Department of State:
    (1) With respect to a for-profit corporation, a major change in 
ownership or control is deemed to have occurred when one third (33.33%) 
or more of its stock is sold or otherwise transferred within a 12-month 
period;
    (2) With respect to a not-for-profit corporation, a major change of 
control is deemed to have occurred when 51 percent (51%) or more of the 
board of trustees or other like body, vested with its management, is 
replaced within a 12-month period.
    (f) Non-compliance with other requirements. A sponsor fails to 
remain in compliance with Federal, State, local, or professional 
requirements necessary to carry out the activity for which it is 
designated, including loss of accreditation, or licensure.
    (g) Failure to apply for redesignation. A sponsor fails to apply 
for redesignation, pursuant to the terms and conditions of Sec.  62.7, 
prior to the conclusion of its current designation period. If so 
terminated, the former sponsor may apply for a new program designation, 
but the program activity will be suspended during the pendency of the 
application.


Sec.  62.61  Revocation.

    The Department may terminate a sponsor's program designation by 
revocation for cause as specified in Sec.  62.50. Such sponsor may not 
apply for a new designation for five (5) years following the effective 
date of the revocation.


Sec.  62.62  Termination of, or denial of redesignation for, a class of 
designated programs.

    The Department may, in its sole discretion, determine that a class 
of designated programs compromises the national security of the United 
States or no longer furthers the public diplomacy mission of the 
Department of State. Upon such a determination, the Office shall:
    (a) Give all sponsors of such class of designated programs not less 
than thirty (30) days' written notice of the revocation of Exchange 
Visitor Program designations for such programs, specifying therein the 
grounds and effective date for such revocations; or
    (b) Give any sponsor of such class of designated programs not less 
than thirty (30) days' written notice of its denial of the sponsor's 
application for redesignation, specifying therein the grounds for such 
denial and effective date of such denial. Revocation of designation or 
denial of redesignation on the above-specified grounds for a class of 
designated programs is the final decision of the Department.


Sec.  62.63  Responsibilities of the sponsor upon termination or 
revocation.

    Upon termination or revocation of its program designation, a 
sponsor must:
    (a) Fulfill its responsibilities to all exchange visitors who are 
in the United States at the time of the termination or revocation; and
    (b) Notify exchange visitors who have not entered the United States 
that the program has been terminated or revoked, unless a transfer to 
another designated program can be obtained.

    Dated: October 22, 2007.
Stanley S. Colvin,
Director, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, Bureau of 
Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E7-21522 Filed 11-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P